Standerdizing video formats

[PhreeZone 20]

I've heard this kicked around a few times over the last few years but I'm now wondering when the FAI/USPA are going to officially update the standards for the video format for Nationals/World meet. The current documentation says that it needs to be delivered in NTSC format for US Nationals or PAL for the worlds via FireWire. It makes no mention if it needs to be 4:3 or 16:9. It also does not make mention of the newer formats like HDV or the AVCHD formats that are region agnostic if you capture in their HD formats. It seems that the current criteria is set up for analog judging and is not prepared for the present world of HD video and non-tape based cameras. Since Sony is already phasing out their tape based cameras and the solid state camera's do no have firewire on them that is going to put us a camera flyers in the situation to either have to hunt out older used equipment to get the firewire abilities or to buy new cameras that are not accepted via the rules.

What is the camera flyers opinion on this? Is this something that we need to be getting our opinions on to the USPA/FAI so the committees there can lobby to change the rules to fit the newly emerging world of solid state delivery of video?

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[DSE 5]

Phree,
As you know, I have a lot of opinions on this, and there are a couple people working on this directive in addition to you.
If the FAI isn't able to quickly change this, they're going to hose a lot of people.
Obviously OmniSkore is a big fly in the ointment in this discussion too. This is where Sony Vegas worked well at Nationals, we had every format under the sun coming in. HDV, AVCHD, DVCAM, DV NTSC, DV PAL...one right after another. We also had wide and 4:3. I don't expect FAI would standardize on one video platform, but they do need a means of standarizing output from XXX to OmniSkore or whatever (NEEDS) to replace it.
Widescreen is the standard for ALL video cameras worldwide from now til we're all dead, most likely. Whether it's 1:212.1, 1:85.1, whatever, it's all widescreen.
Compression for the future is all MPEG. HDV, AVCHD, AVCI, MP4, and even a potential of MJ2K are all around MPEG decoders.
1080i is obviously the new standard worldwide. Whatever the FAI accepts must be 1080 50/60i/p capable.
The next 12 years are expected to circle around these standards. A few things like bitrate may change, and a few aspects of MPEG (MPEG 21, etc) may change, but
MPEG
Widescreen
1080
will not change as standards over the next decade or perhaps longer.
Xfer format no longer matters so long as they add USB to the acceptable ingest mechanisms. USB opens the door for all card-based systems, and any NLE that supports 1394-based Xfer (other than Apple) will support USB Xfer in full.
In fact, other than Apple, every NLE on the planet supports AVCHD, AVCi, HDV, DV.
The reason this is important, is to demonstrate that any pc-platform can decode these MPEG formats and variants, and likely always will.
Fortunately, at Nationals nothing was so short-sighted, and the systems devised by Trunk and myself was flawless, filled the OmniSkore requirements, and allowed for very fast Xfer, replay, and archive of over 1000 videos. We had a card reader and 1394 ports, plus analog card, so we could manage 2 ingests at the same time, of any format brought forward. We also coverted PAL to NTSC in real-time.

[dragon2 2]

And how do you suppose that works in the real world? We used to judge using composite video, using VHS. Now we have dvd burners and input firewire SD quality, 4:3 or 16:9 we don't care. We require this, so FINALLY no more old camera which only have composite (and yes someone wanted to use one for Worlds CF ...). Now if you show up with a CX-type camera (which wasn't allowed but as a backup, in an emergency, ...) you are going to have to dub using composite which is less resolution than SD so more difficult to judge and may cost you points.

WHAT do you propose we use for AVCHD and all it's variants? Buy lots of quadcore computers to use for dubbing? With what software? Buy lots of licenses of premiere pro cs4? Are you kidding

And then what, we require ALL cameraflyers to deliver the same format? All Sony AVCHD? There's only a small percentage of competitive cameraflyers using those, so far. At least here and for the CF worlds there was NONE.

BTW the region agnostics isn't entirely true, you're still dealing with framerate differences which may very well be used to cheat (been done before) so that'll have to be checked.

I think the skydiving world isn't ready to make the switch yet. Maybe in a few years.

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[PhreeZone 20]

There is no frame rate difference with HDV or the newer MPEG based formats unless someone decides to shoot at 24p. All the HD formats are 1080 60i/30p. There are some that are 1080p60 but even that is still not region based and it on the 30/60 frame rate. There is no more 25/29.97 frame issues with HD formats. They are also all the same size for frames.

Even low end software is able to edit AVCHD format video (except Apple's), it takes some CPU but unless you are editing and then rendering to another format a older dual core system works just fine. My 4 year old PC chewed though HDV footage just as fast as it did the DV footage and the limited AVCHD I've played with seems to edit just fine on older machines provided the footage is not 10 minutes in length.

At US nationals years in 2005 there were Hi-8's, Mini-DV, Micro-DV, and a few other exotic formats and it was a nightmare being stuck behind someone that needed to go dig out special analog cables to copy their footage down to a VHS tape/DVD that was then used for judging.

A line needs to be drawn in the sand somewhere on what formats and inputs are going to be accepted. Since you can not purchase a new camera that is not 1080 and wide screen at this point (shy of some of the bullet cams and other one offs) then the FAI needs to look at when they will require 1080 level and wide screen video. Also since with 2009 the major product lines are phasing out their tape based camera's from all indications then FAI also needs to look at what is going to be required to accommodate where the market is going with the camera designs. It does not need to occur in 2009 but it needs to be looked at as a requirement in the next 2 years in my opinion.

My personal thoughts are if you are going to spend the thousands to tens of thousands of dollars in training to go to the world meet level (or even as a some what serious Nationals team) then the least you can do is have your video flyer spend the $500 needed to get a 1080 level camera. Even getting a replacement used PC series camera costa as much as a used HC3/5 series camera does anymore

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[beowulf 1]

It would be nice to have all the video in 1080i. I don't think it would be unreasonable to require all camera flyers to shoot in some form of 1080i, either HDV or AVCHD. The cost of the camera is not that much anymore.

[dragon2 2]

Quote

It would be nice to have all the video in 1080i. I don't think it would be unreasonable to require all camera flyers to shoot in some form of 1080i, either HDV or AVCHD. The cost of the camera is not that much anymore.

Not everyone shoots topmount. What about the sidemounters? Or anyone using helmets made for specific camera's? Everyone just needs to buy a FTP and new boxes? Maybe have to buy 2 new cameras each? And new switches probably too... Adds up pretty quickly.

But I'm more concerned about national organisations not going to buy new equipment anytime soon. And have the people to use it too. Our judges, no way... If the FAI mandates anything else but firewire, we cannot handle it. Not now. And we're likely not the only ones.

Sure in a few years time, but for now, this year we had 1 guy show up with a cx6 at nationals, just one. So, not really a big problem here, yet. Most people have their trusty older cameras or hc5, newbie flyers buy the cx6. But those newbies are going to film teams, well some of them, so we'll have to deal eventually

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[beowulf 1]

Is it better to stick with the old technology and make people have to buy off of Ebay? or push forward and require people to update their equipment?
It will be come harder and more expensive to buy older cameras just to accomadate those that don't want to spend the money to update to new cameras. If that includes buying a new helmet etc, hey I did it. I wanted to shoot in HD so at the begining of this year I bought a whole new setup, camera and helmet. At the US Nationals I ended up shooting SD instead of HD because I didn't want the judges to see letter boxed wide screen video. It's on my wish list that the judges would instead see the competition video in HD on LCD widescreen TV's. I don't think that will happen this next year, but I think we need to start pushing for that to happen.

[PhreeZone 20]

A lot of these complaints are the same ones I heard from the tandem guys that were shooting 35mm stills and didn't want to upgrade to digital. They thought it was going to cost too much and their existing gear worked just fine for how it was used...

Personally I think that as he rules stand right now that if you need to use anything other then what is laid out as a transport medium then you should be disqualified from being judged. Currently that means firewire only and that sucks since the CX and TG series cameras are going to replace the PC series in the field in the next year or two. Unless the rules are changed then all the currently made cameras are not going to be allowed and that just screws us as camera flyers.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[ltdiver 3]

Quote

It would be nice to have all the video in 1080i. I don't think it would be unreasonable to require all camera flyers to shoot in some form of 1080i, either HDV or AVCHD. The cost of the camera is not that much anymore.

X2. Any competitive cameraflyer normally flys 2 cameras for competitions. So this cost analysis needs to be multiplied by a factor of 2. If the FAI decides to upgrade their requirements to only allow the 1080i format I'll be bowing out of one of my favorite parts of this sport.

ltdiver

Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon

[beowulf 1]

I don't think it's unreasonable when you consider it wouldn't necessarily go into effect till maybe 2010. This year you could purchase one new camera and for competition use the new HD camera as back up and the SD camera as primary. The HD cameras can record SD footage. Eventually it will too expensive and too hard to find the old cameras to use for competition. Why wait till that happens?

[ltdiver 3]

Quote

I don't think it's unreasonable when you consider it wouldn't necessarily go into effect till maybe 2010. This year you could purchase one new camera and for competition use the new HD camera as back up and the SD camera as primary. The HD cameras can record SD footage. Eventually it will too expensive and too hard to find the old cameras to use for competition. Why wait till that happens?

Feel free to invest. It's just not in my budget. (and people still bitch about paying a cameraflyer for qualified footage, but that's another thread not this one).

ltdiver

Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon

[DSE 5]

Quote

you are going to have to dub using composite which is less resolution than SD so more difficult to judge and may cost you points.
.

Composite video IS SD video. it's square (if there were pixels in analog video) vs non-square pixels, that's all.
Doesn't it seem a conflict to be upset about resolution and judging yet in the same breath condem 88% *more* resolution?

There are *far* more variants of SD video formats than there are MPEG-relatives in HD.

AVCHD doesn't have "variants" outside of bitrate, which doesn't cause any decoding issues. In that regard, it's similar to DVCAM/DV. AVCHD is a standard no different than DV. If you'll recall two years ago in this same forum it was commented that AVCHD is the new DV. And it has become so.

There are variants of MPEG, of which AVCHD is a part.
An NLE is not required to capture/playback AVCHD. Aside from Media Player, there are *many* free players. Exporting to a delivery-mechanism is entirely file based, and can be as simple as a thumbdrive or as difficult as a DVD or email. It's faster, more easily transportable, fewer variants, same frame size worldwide. Same colorspace worldwide.

So...here's a scenario.
You can't buy a CRT monitor for either PAL or NTSC in a year (green laws). You can't buy an SD monitor in a year. Everything is at least 720p.
Parts on existing gear fail. We watched a few old pieces of gear fail at this year's Nationals.
Cameras fail, especially in skydiving.
So in three years time, on gear not expected to have a half-life of three years...we expect competitors to view 4:3 SD video over composite or Firewire on an HD monitor where (by argument of resolution) the signal is less than a quarter the resolution of the monitor, and therefore soft, fuzzy, and significantly LESS judgeable than composite SD that you already feel could conceivably cost the team points?

Technology is rapidly advancing, costs are coming down, and if it means losing some good people along the way...so be it. Unfortunate, but it's part of the game. It's expensive for everyone. A cage here, a box there, a new control switch for a new camera, gotta have a laptop for archiving, it's *all* expensive.
Widescreen isn't optimal for team video, but that's the way of the world. There isn't an animal known as 4:3 LCD anymore... in the words of another moderator friend..."suck it up, cupcake."

The WORLD has standardized. Skydiving competition is going to have to catch up, either sooner or later. There isn't a "next big thing" coming soon. UXHD is at least a decade off, and it won't be the same techno-leap we've taken in just under two years.
Two years ago, people were saying "no one gives a shit about HD." Four years ago, my company invested heavily in HD, and we won out over competition because of it. A year ago, people were saying HD-DVD was king, and in this same forum I wrote I believed HD DVD would lose. It did. It was also said BD would continue to be a device for the elite. Not with Walmart selling 149.00 Blu-ray players and $13.00 Blu-ray discs, it isn't.

HD, like it or not, is the way of the greater world even if parts of the world are not yet in sync. On February 16, 2009, the USA will be entirely digital and heavily HD in broadcast both OTA/direct. The rest of the world will follow suit.

Personally? It doesn't matter one way or the other if FAI competitions use outdated gear for the next millenia.
Yet it's obvious that folks do care, do realize the very nasty quandry the competitive world is about to find itself mired in, and interested in creating a solution before the problem becomes unmanageable. And it will be unmanageable sooner than later. The rock don't roll fast, but once it starts to roll, it'll roll over you hard if you don't have a plan to move quickly.
If there isn't a solution in two years, in three years it'll be a monster mess.
A small comparison....CYPRES uses a technology that only has a lifespan of 12 years and they're a pampered, managed technology that is relatively simple. Some people scream and threaten to quit jumping because they have to replace them, or else they forego jumping with one once it does reach EOL.
And that's OK, isn't it?
If the decision is to not grow with the technology, perhaps quit jumping camera, or understand that you just won't be able to jump at some events.
Just like some DZ's won't allow you to jump without a CYPRES.
Progress is a bitch. But it's better than the alternative, isn't it?

[quade 4]

Quote

Composite video IS SD video. it's square (if there were pixels in analog video) vs non-square pixels, that's all.

Ahem . . . not exactly. Once a piece of video goes from being digital to composite (not even component!), it suffers quite a bit from chroma crawl no matter what and there's no going back. Additionally 640x480 square px vs 720x480 rectangular px . . . yeah . . . there IS a slight difference there too!

I'm certain you know this, but it may have slipped your mind.

Anyway . . . Spot I think you're doing a bang up job.

(This next bit isn't directed to anyone in particular but the thread as a whole.)

I too was once a Video Coordinator at a Nationals and it's a thankless job that has to put up with a wide variety of standards no matter what happens. The truth of the matter is that if a team shows up, you're going to HAVE to deal with it no matter what the camera/format is and no amount of trying to lay down the law and forcing camera flyers to only work in one format is going to happen. If they show up, somehow between the camera flyer and the dubbing team a solution to the issue will be found and they WILL be allowed to jump and be judged on the video. I'm not saying it's right to put the dubbing staff through it and I'm not saying that standards shouldn't be in the rules, I'm saying you'll have to deal with whatever comes your way because it's coming whether you like it or not.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[DSE 5]

Quote

Ahem . . . not exactly. Once a piece of video goes from being digital to composite (not even component!), it suffers quite a bit from chroma crawl no matter what and there's no going back. Additionally 640x480 square px vs 720x480 rectangular px . . . yeah . . . there IS a slight difference there too!

I'm certain you know this, but it may have slipped your mind.

Yes, I know this, but at the same time, on the display side (not acquisition side) 1.212 or .909 pixels output over composite are same analog dim as 640x486. And...there are no pixels in analog video.
Not to be picky...I think you meant "once digital goes to component (not even composite!)" assuming you meant once it goes to Ypb/pr (given that the bandwidth of Y/C is the same as composite?)

Then we get into the discussion of 4:1:1 and 4:2:2 or 4:2:0 SD vs 4:2:0 MPEG...and lions and tigers and bears, OH MY!.

Damn. That's twice in one DAY I've tried to keep it simple and gotten my ass in a sling for it.

Incidentally, your post caused me to realize that I failed to bring up progressive vs interlaced (and please don't get me going on Kell Factor, Quade). The future is entirely progresssive, yet cams for the next 24 months will be a combinant of interlaced sensors and progressive delivery, and then we move to PsF, which will keep our not-yet-purchased new cams fairly current, and with NLE tools, entirely current. But...
This too, needs to be considered as we move into the "next big thing." Some folks weren't around 14 years ago when DV debuted, and they've been only familiar with that world. What we're going into now is identical to what happened in broadcast, only accelerated.

Quote

Anyway . . . Spot I think you're doing a bang up job.

high praise from the guy that started it all. Thank you, Quade.

[PhreeZone 20]

If you are on a team that is requiring 2 camera's for Nationals then I would hope you are charging enough money to either pay for the gear outright over the entire season or you are saving the money that you would have been putting into the jumps and use that money instead to get cameras. This is no different then if the school suddenly started requiring all stills to be at least 10 megapixels or HD, some camera flyers would need to go get new gear in order to keep working. With the cost of new CX series cameras under $700 and used HC's going for less then $400 cost is a hard thing to justify as holding back coming up with a standerd that is in line with what the camera manufacturers are using currently.

In a lot of ways getting HDV camera's is cheaper for the teams that are looking at Worlds since they do not have to swap over to PAL gear if they are able to run at HDV at Worlds also. Instead of having to own 4 cameras's (2 NTSC and 2 PAL) they only need 2 HDV/AVCHD cameras

I know in speaking to the judges that they greatly prefer judging the video on 15 inch monitors or smaller since it is less eye strain to have to look at the whole picture to see if there is a bust or not vs on a large screen. CRT is on its way out the door and as such there goes the need to be constrained to the NTSC videos.

This is an issue that is going to be a major issue in the next few years and I think now is the time to have the conversation about it since OmniSkore is using old CRT's and is not able to handle the data in a digital format directly. Nationals as it stands now does not have the requirement to use anything except Firewire and as much assistance as the Video panel can do to help those that do not follow the rules we are going to be facing a situation where a computer is going to be the fastest way to deal with 100+ teams worth of video in 2-3 days.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[DSE 5]

Quote

In a lot of ways getting HDV camera's is cheaper for the teams that are looking at Worlds since they do not have to swap over to PAL gear if they are able to run at HDV at Worlds also. Instead of having to own 4 cameras's (2 NTSC and 2 PAL) they only need 2 HDV/AVCHD cameras
.

To clarify a semi-small point...HD makes frame SIZES the same worldwide, but due to 50Hz and 60Hz electrical systems, the frame RATE is still different, we're still dealing with 50i/60i or 25p/30p. However, virtually everything new can play both frame rates as well. ALL NLE systems can deal with either framerate.
In other words, while there is no more PAL/NTSC, we do still have a framerate difference that will always exist due to the different electrical frequency differences between the US/Canada/Japan and most of the rest of the world.

[PharmerPhil 0]

Just my observation (I haven't compete since 2004, and then it was all composite).

I would think that whereas most NLEs can handle multiple formats (often on the same timeline), the requirement shouldn't be one of which format, but of which, or which of many different delivery protocols are acceptable. For example, rather than mandating 1080i widescreen, how about saying that the video must be delivered via one of a few cables such as firewire, usb, HDMI, or even (shutter) composite. It is still the teams responsibility to show the skydive (for example, grips in RW).

That way you are not excluding many very good and serviceable cameras (or flyers), and you are not ruling out potential future codecs or formats. I mean really, who cares if it is 16:9 vs. 4:3 or 1080P vs. 480i as long as you can see the skydive? There definitely would be an advantage to those who use higher quality formats. i.e. if the judges can't quite make out whether a grip is there or not based on your old 300 line composite feed, that's your fault just as a non-judgeable angle would be your fault. That's what you gave them to judge on. The teams that deliver smokin' 1080p resolution have an advantage, but it is an advantage that is available to any team.

BTW, on a somewhat related issue, I have always wondered in the old days if grips that were provided on video by the camera person weren't seen by the judges because of old over-scanning televisions (i.e. the grips were in the full screen signal, but were chopped by the judging TV). I can't imagine it hasn't happened, but was it ever challenged?

And BTW, the "standerd" (sic) method of spelling is "Standardization."

[Icon134 0]

I haven't competed at a national level at all... (just a round here and there at local dzs.)

but I agree that the "format" of the footage shouldn't matter much... and for that matter why can't the FAI/USPA allow the older formats while accomidating the changes to the new formats? That's essentially what the U.S. government has been doing over the past several years prior to the analog shut off comming in Feb 2009.

There's nothing that says they can't allow for a few years of a transition period for the old technology to wear out thus allowing the users to transistion to new technologies.

(you will certainly lose some people...) if anyone is interested I'll see if I can locate my families old panasonic VCR/Videocamera Combo from the early 80s... I think it still works but you'll need to find somewhere to stash the pouch that holds the recording unit (about the size of a small desktop computer case) and the "camera" part of the system probably has a few snag issues...

Livin' on the Edge... sleeping with my rigger's wife...

[PhreeZone 20]

The issue is one that DSE touched on and goes a lot further then just adding the words "Component, HDMI, or USB" as transport medium to the list in the rules.

How many camera flyers are still using Digital 8 or VHS-C? Those are perfectly serviceable formats too if you want to deliver footage via component correct?

Someone can correct me if I am wrong but I am pretty sure this was the first year that a NLE was used to get all the footage to the DVD format that was used to judge with.

This boils down to OmniSkore which is the US judging solution only being able to deal with certain variables and its limitations. The current version uses custom controllers that I've been told you can not even get replacement buttons for and runs on a old 486 or 386 system that is very temperamental. The issue is that to develop a version of OmniSkore that is current on technology and can do direct from PC judging is an investment that no one is willing to make at this time since the cost is more then could be recouped in a reasonable amount of time.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

Someone can correct me if I am wrong but I am pretty sure this was the first year that a NLE was used to get all the footage to the DVD format that was used to judge with.

At US Nationals? Judging was done with composite to DVD recorders. NLE simultaneously captured to a hard drive for other uses.

Dave

[beowulf 1]

All of my video was recorded to hard drive via NLE. After that I don't know what they did with it. I know it wasn't recorded to DVD from my camera. They tried that for two rounds and it didn't work right and the video was lost so I had to redo it via NLE.

[pilotdave 0]

Ahh, maybe they changed after 4-way ended. But for 4-way we plugged in firewire and composite at the same time. Judging was live off the camera through composite and video was also captured in Vegas through firewire at the same time (unless ya had an AVCHD camera).

Dave

[beowulf 1]

I used an HC5 and only hooked up the firewire.

[DSE 5]

The capture/Xfer process varied from point to point. There were moments that the OmniSkore system failed or a component on that end of the chain failed, so only 1394 was used to capture to keep the line moving, and then a print from the NLE was used to re-feed the judges while video was being ingested in another instance of the application.
In other words, the system is capable of operating independently of the OmniSkore system, feeding OmniSkore in real-time or time-shifted.
The guys that had file-based cams had it the fastest, as their files could be Xferred while video was being captured.
A 1 minute jump takes one minute to cap via tape, file-based takes less than 10 seconds.
Quade's point regarding formats is right on, IMO, and it was part of the design that Trunk put into that part of the system; Any and all comers, PAL, NTSC, widescreen, HDV, DV, AVCHD were all ingested. There were two very old cams that had issues interfacing via firewire, so tapes were removed from the cams and cap'd separately in a different machine. At least...that's what occurred when I was sitting at the stations. Can't comment on what took place later. I was only there for 4, 8way, and CRW.

[Wolkku 0]

Hi,

New rules for FS are now online and noticed this change after reading it very quickly:

2008
4.6.2. For the purpose of these rules, «freefall video equipment» shall consist of the complete video
system(s) used to record the video evidence of the team’s freefall performance, including the
camera(s), video media, tape recorder(s), and battery(ies). All freefall video equipment must be able to
deliver a PAL digital signal through an IEEE 1394 compatible connection (Firewire).

2009
4.5.2. For the purpose of these rules, «freefall video equipment» shall consist of the complete video
system(s) used to record the video evidence of the team’s freefall performance, including the
camera(s), video media, tape recorder(s), and battery(ies). All freefall video equipment must be able to
deliver a PAL digital signal through an IEEE 1394 compatible connection (Firewire) or composite
video compatible connection

The use of composite video output is now allowed. Is this added for us to allow the use of camcoders like CX105/CX11 etc... ?